Senate Voc. Ed. Bill Draws Lots of Criticism

Vocational educators and conservative groups are sounding alarms
over a major vocational education bill that a Senate panel approved
unanimously last week.

Both sets of critics raised numerous objections and threatened to
withdraw their support for the measure, which would reauthorize funding
for federal vocational education, job training, and adult education
programs--a big sticking point for some in the vocational education
community who believe their field should be treated separately.

Members of the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee said they
would be open to some compromises before the bill comes up for a vote
in the chamber later this month.

The American Vocational Association, for one, plans to push for a
"broad range of changes" before the bill gets to the Senate floor,
according to AVA Executive Director Nancy O'Brien.

Her organization was one of 20 education groups to sign a letter
expressing reservations about the funding system and other parts of the
bill.

But Senate committee leaders warned that while they are willing to
make minor changes to the bill, rewriting it is not feasible.

"Let me be clear: We are not going to rewrite this bill," said Sen.
Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, one of the chief sponsors of S 1186. "We are
willing to fine-tune it."

After a Senate vote, the proposed Workforce Investment Partnership
Act will go to a conference committee to work out the vast differences
between it and a related House bill.

The House bill to reauthorize the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and
Technical Education Act was passed in July.

It dealt only with vocational education, leaving adult education and
other programs in separate legislation.

Funding Questions

A crucial point of contention for the Senate plan is a new funding
formula that would give priority to states with unified plans, which
combine vocational education with other job-training programs, when
awarding federal grants.

Ms. O'Brien of the Alexandria, Va.-based AVA said relying on a
state's funding structure rather than its students' academic
performance could mean fewer federal vocational education dollars for
schools.

If funding isn't earmarked, she said, states could take shift money
away from schools and instead use it for other programs in their
unified vocational education-job training plans, she said.

Kim Kubiak, the executive director of the National Association of
State Directors of Vocational and Technical Education, based in
Washington, said the Senate bill is now written too broadly to
understand its full impact.

But she, too, feared that vocational education and schools would
lose funding under the plan.

Streamlining Effort

The sponsors of the bill said they intended to streamline the
patchwork of current programs for vocational education and job
training.

A central part of the bill is the "one-stop service system," which
was designed to provide information on a variety of services available
to students and others seeking job skills.

It would also link federal job-training activities to other related
programs that could be of service to the customers.

Mr. DeWine defended provisions in the bill, pointing to new programs
that would target vocational education for at-risk students and
dropouts.

Efforts to help those groups was a priority in drafting the bill, he
said.

But Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said he would push for authorization of
more funding for technology in vocational education classrooms.

The inclusion of vocational education in an omnibus bill that also
contains adult and job-training programs angered some conservative
groups, which are wary of what they see as a move toward a federal role
in determining students' career paths.

Kris Ardizzone, the executive director of the Eagle Forum, said her
St. Louis-based organization may again use the grass-roots lobbying
efforts that helped it sink last year's vocational education
reauthorization to protest this year's version if senators do not
create separate vocational education legislation.

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.